Why is the LNG modelling in New Zealand controversial?

Key conclusions from the modelling have been withheld, raising concerns about transparency and whether the project is economically justified.

What is the LNG import facility proposal?

It is a proposed $2.7 billion project to import liquefied natural gas, funded in part by a levy on electricity consumers.

Why does this matter for New Zealand households?

Households may face higher power bills to fund the project, while questions remain about its necessity and long-term impact on energy policy.

LNG modelling NZ: Ombudsman complaint over secrecy

Lawyers for Climate Action NZ and the New Zealand Climate Foundation have filed a complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman New Zealand, challenging Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment’s decision to withhold critical conclusions from modelling underpinning the Government’s plan to proceed with a $2.7 billion LNG import facility.

The facility would be funded by a levy on every New Zealand electricity consumer.

After first requesting the report in February 2026, a slide deck prepared by Concept Consulting was released in April — but with key slides, including the executive summary, conclusions, and recommendations, redacted.

– Advertisement –

Jessica Palairet, Executive Director of Lawyers for Climate Action, says:

They’re hiding the conclusion — not just the detail

“The government is withholding some of the most important information about the modelling.

“If the LNG Import Facility proceeds, New Zealanders will be asked to pay a compulsory levy on their power bills… They deserve to see the full evidence base for this decision.”

MBIE is relying on the “free and frank opinions” exception under the Official Information Act 1982 — but the Ombudsman’s own guidance suggests that exemption rarely applies to external consultants.

Even if it did, the public interest argument for release is overwhelming.

Because the material that has been released raises serious questions.

The modelling did not consider international LNG price volatility — a glaring omission given current global instability.

It assumes “unlimited gas supply deliverability” without addressing real-world constraints like shipping timelines and minimum volumes.

Gas demand may be overstated, and the urgency of LNG supply in 2028 is unclear.

And critically — the $90–$180 million annual cost of the terminal exceeds the projected system savings, even under extreme scenarios.

So why are we being asked to pay for this?

Development of additional gas storage, such as the Tariki field, could eliminate any benefit LNG provides to electricity security.

Which raises the obvious question:

Why is this project being pushed ahead at all?

The scenarios reinforce that the single most effective way to improve electricity security and lower prices is continued investment in renewable generation — yet the modelling does not explain why this isn’t the primary focus.

“This is a decision with major implications for household bills, climate commitments, and long-term fossil fuel dependency,” says Palairet.

Next steps

“We have sought urgent resolution. The Government aims to finalise a contract by mid-2026.”

NOTES:

The Concept Consulting report was released as a document LNG_008_7 in an OIA response bundle, available on request.
Lawyers for Climate Action and the Climate Foundation first sent an OIA requesting the urgent release of the full report on 20 February 2026. They made a complaint to the Ombudsman on 20 March, after MBIE failed to release that information, and they eventually received the redacted documents on 13 April 2026. Available on request. 3. The Ombudsman’s guide to section 9(2)(g)(i) is available at:

https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/resources/free-and-frank-opinions-guide-sec tion-92gi-oia-and-section-72fi-lgoima